If you've done some serious reading on 20th century activities of the "international banking elite", and reviewed the patterns of the last century, you would see the world's most powerful international banking new world order types way too close to the goal line for your personal comfort.

The officer corps of the U.S. military is a key piece of the puzzle. At the beginning of the U.S. Civil War, the U.S. military basically divided itself into two sides and fought itself. The question then was on succession. In the future the question to the service members would be on federation: Will you swear a new oath of allegiance that is not solely to the U.S. Constitution, but to an international body of which the U.S. is a member ? The Navy is already being forced to repeat the mantra that they are "a global force for good". Depending on the military's center of gravity, we would either see the U.S. becoming part of a larger union, or a showdown of some kind. Flag officers winding up retiring to the Council on Foreign Relations and continual propagandizing at the Service Academies, IMHO, signifies a strategy to keep slowly chipping away until the military is amenable to oath changes, which assures the new world order transition with only minor annoyance for resistance.

All news networks are ceaselessly pounding out propaganda on gun control, like a bird dog flushing out it's prey. Surely somewhere analysts are judging the public's reaction to this constant pinging.

The purebred globalist Richard Fisher, lieutentant at the Dallas Fed, coyly used the "Texan" angle to play the Fed's "conservative" "rebel" in a burst of pings this week designed to sow the seeds of setting up for a segmented collapse. Statism's local monopoly banks in the U.S. could then essentially survive a meltdown, along with the Fed, enabling their continued use as loan sharks to the nation as a whole. The last century surely has taught us that statists have perfected the meltdown just has much as they have mastered civil unrest and casus belli.

It's good to be the King, but it's better to be the lender of last resort to the King who is in debt up to his eyeballs.

The military is being propagandized that the “far right” is their enemy.

They are being taught that it is acceptable for the military to attack these people, that they are enemies of the U.S. government and the people.

Did you know that the press in the U.S. was brought under control of international bankers about a century ago ? “Media bias” did not just spontaneously happen. Media control allows international banking to win most elections and prevent “rogue” candidates that work for them from getting elected. Most people active as Democrats or Republicans have no idea that they are doing the bidding of globalists. Most Democrats do because their party openly supports collectivism and statism. The highest levels of the Republican establishment - they certainly know who they are working for.

No other nations will be there to fight for the idea of separate nations; America is the one last remaining blockage to one world government.

Treason for the last century.

Civil resistance in America will be crushed like a bug by the U.S. military.

A few AR-15s are no match for M1A1 tanks and F-16s, civil resistance will be little more than an annoyance.

Packing up a few MREs and heading for the hills will be useless in defeating what will be a statist takeover of the U.S. from the inside of the government.

That is why the key question is - how many of the U.S. military will support globalism and how many will support the American people and it’s legitimate government, which has been smeared for a century by the press as the “radical right” ?

“Civil resistance in America will be crushed like a bug by the U.S. military.”

You mean just like in Afghanistan?

A few AR-15s are no match for M1A1 tanks and F-16s, civil resistance will be little more than an annoyance.

They have to come out sometime. Tanks are for killing other tanks not chasing infantry and F16s are blind without someone on the ground observing. They have to be fed, have supplies delivered, have things manufactured for them. They also have families to care for.

5
posted on 01/20/2013 7:26:15 AM PST
by dljordan
(Voltaire: "To find out who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.")

When I say American I mean the last vestiges of national sovereignty America has, the last few tens of millions of Americans who bristle at the thought of statism, that pesky Constitution, etc.

It’s not those “real Americans” leading the charge for one world government. But then again, those “real Americans” aren’t in charge. It’s the elites that operate behind the scenes and use the American government like a puppetmaster that have been making America cause all that “interference” as you so wonderfully put it.

Many people are not aware of this: the Council on Foreign Relations was founded by J P Morgan.

Helllllooooooo.

The CFR virtually IS the U.S. State Department. CFR men have been THE Presidential foreign policy advisors since the founding of CFR. The League of Nations was a creation of CFR. Wilson was elected through the invaluable efforts of the CFR and sold his soul to them and did their bidding. He was a nobody until the banksters propped him up.

Name a war in the 20th century, it’s backed financially on all sides by the banking elites.

Our Democrat and Republican “politics” is our own little sideshow which is just an illusion that the citizens are able to elect “their own” leaders. Trouble is, very few of either party on not working for the banksters one world government plans (whether they know it or not). So if the banksters control who is nominated on both tickets - whether you vote Dem or Repub - you still get a bankster man in office ! I don’t call that the “people electing their own leaders”, but I’m funny that way.

Perhaps one world government may get America’s “brandname” attached to it, but personally I like to draw that “fine line” distinction between a “nation” interfering with other nations versus a tryannical government that illegitimately took over a nation interfering with other nations.

Perliger's article at West Point is just another so called "study," in the continuous drum beat to gin up hate against Americans who believe in the Constitution. These and other articles in the state controlled media will be used to influence public opinion to disarm law abiding Americans.

Since this "study," is directed at the officer corp, 0bama will more than likely have most of the military follow his orders when the time comes. Oh, make no mistake about it, the time will come.

I'm fairly certain it isn't worth wasting one's precious life energy "fighting" the CFR/international banking elite. If one feels strongly enough about overthrowing them, one would have to spend one's life doing something like preparing for and achieving a seat on the JP Morgan board of directors to make any real difference at all. And by the time one did all of that, there is a 99% chance they will have enticed you into their empire, anyway. Partisan politics is just a game for narcissists - and enough conservatives seem to have figured that out that they didn't bother voting for "their" guy this time.

Many of America's problems can be alleviated (not solved, alas) if liberty-minded focus hard on local issues and representatives and stop worrying so much about the Clown College in DC. It's the height of folly, for example, to get upset over the nightly Fox News broadcast about Obama's latest outrage when your local school board is filled with Leftists and you stayed home to watch TV and didn't bother to go to the meeting. :)

The banking elite is fast moving America to give up it’s sovereignty. That will be a worldwide nightmare, the worst in history by far.

It’s happening now.

When it happens, your job won’t matter, local politics won’t matter.

What was it like in every communist revolution - what was it like living in the communist state that came out of it ?

Nightmare.

I don’t think people cared much about the stinking local school board at that point. Especially considering if they complained too much and annoyed the wrong local leader they wound up in the Gulag Archipelago.

Forgive me for not approaching organizing with the goal of fighting partisan battles, but the banksters own both sides, left and right. And guess what - the banksters ARE the left. Ford built a plant in Russia in the 1930s. Wilson refused to be against the Bolsheviks. Wilson gave Trotsky a passport to get him from the U.S. to Russia to attend the revolution. A Director of the Federal Reserve traveled with other Wall Streeters to Russia to set up funding for the Bolsheviks. The list of evidence goes on and on throughout the 20th century. Practically everything I was taught about the 20th century was bogus (mostly what was left out).

It’s morning, time for me to wake up and smell the coffee.

If you’d like to do local organizing please FReepmail me. I’m calling ALL patriots. It’s not crazy, this is real as a heart attack, it’s time to get going.

I don’t believe it is impossible. In fact, I’ve been planning for several years. At least a hundred million people would be on the side of what’s right if they knew how they’ve been lied to. That’s the only thing keeping America sovereign right now, those pesky people who don’t want to give up their nation. But those hundred million need to get up off the couch, as you say and put the remote down.

Being a little dsimissive there, sweetheart? A few? You mean about 60,000,000?

No, I've just thought through some scenarios. Granted, I'm not a professional; I'm just using public info and some common sense. Of course a small team, if they're good, can do a lot of damage.

It would be a war of attrition. The government forces would have control of virtually all food and supplies, everything from gasoline to toilet paper to medical supplies, the entire supply chain, transportation, the Air Force, most of the larger cities and their police forces and State National Guards, drones, every airport, etc. The government could work on the rebels access to vehicle repair parts, motor oil, gasoline. The government would control gun manufacturing, replacement parts and ammunition factories. Food production is critical and the government forces would work with companies like the globalist bankster-controlled Archer Daniels Midland to ensure that civilians had food and rebels were foraging for themselves.

The government forces would be facing off against many small groups that were lightly armed (no tanks, artillery, planes). This rebel force would need to keep on the good side of citizens who sat it out in their homes (if they attacked the citizenry they'd be viewed simply as terrorists and bandits). The rebels would be hard pressed to have any communication that the government could not shut off or worse monitor. They would have a very difficult time having cell phones, ipods or internet as they could not legitimately pay monthly bills to service providers. They would have to hook up with underground civilian networks of people (necessitating funding) who would procure illegitimate communications technology on the black market. The rebels would not be able to walk into a doctor or hospital for medical care; that would have to come from the black market; it would be prone to detection and would rely on either funding or people who would take the risky work for free to support the cause. Medical supplies and equipment would have to be brought to hidden medical facilities. Rebels could not use credit or debit cards or have bank accounts; they'd be all cash but would have no earning capability. Sympathetic civilians would have to fund them with cash. Every movement of the rebels exposes them to getting caught.

Once a treaty is signed in DC to join up with an international government (chances are when this happens there will not be a civil war over it, a la the European Union), the rebels would have to somehow defeat the entire U.S. military and then convince the American people to convince Congress to renege on the ratified treaty. We're already in NATO. This change will happen slowly, step by step. People may not even realize when the crucial step is taken.

Rebels would have to abandon their jobs, businesses and homes. Future prospects of them getting hired if they lost would be dim. The largest and most effective forces that were causing the most damage would slowly and methodically be hunted by elite U.S. government forces. If they ran into unpopulated areas, the full fury of attack helicopters, tanks, drones, etc., could be used to mercilessly eradicate them, not to mention that if they're in unpopulated areas they can't win the war, they're just hiding and isolated from society. They'd stand a much better chance of survival by hiding in suburbs or cities operating as "resistance" forces. But every time they did an operation that caused significant damage, the full force of local, State and Federal law enforcement and probably the military would be used to track them by interrogating their friends, neighbors and coworkers. The resistance would need funding, which would be tracked, and would need supply and support, which would expose the resistance to getting caught.

It don't look good, IMHO. I'm just looking at the history of totalitarian regimes in the 20th century. It is extremely difficult and dangerous to bring them down from within.

If the military has significantly divided loyalties, that could wind up in a Civil War (which the banksters would welcome as they would finance both sides). That would be essentially the military dividing into two and fighting itself, with the rebel civilians joining up with the rebel military.

Of course, if treaties are signed, one by one, and everybody stays on the couch, we simply drift towards becoming a unit of the United Nations. IMHO, we'll see NAFTA and other American union agreements gradually solidify the Americas into a one body, like the European Union. Then the bankster's men that run the "unions" can merge the unions into the one world government; they won't have to merge the separate nations directly. Within 20 years, IMHO, if things keep going as they are, there won't be enough resistance amongst Americans to stop it just due to the "hotheaded" people like FReepers getting older (make sure you get the next generation to join FR, get them to read some real history and put the toys down !).

Wacky stuff, IMHO. But the banksters seem to have minds that are simply "wacked".

That’s your first bad assumption that leads to the rest of an illogical conclusion. At most there might be 4 million federal troops, at most. Hell, there are only about 150,000 troops under arms in the first place. You really think 50,000,000+ million Americans will let them have control of anything?? Those F-16’s, M-1 tanks, Bradley vehicles, and the like need massive maintenance, fuel, part, supplies, and just whose families do you think will have their asses swinging in the wind while their service members do the bad deeds? You think they’ll be safe? Do you really think 100% of the military would even go along with such orders as to attack us?

We built those systems, the tanks, the airplanes, the satellites, the communications systems, and the weapon systems. We run them, design them, operate and maintain them. Without all that the fed is deaf, dumb, and blind. The military isnt run by the military. It is run by the civilians that create and maintain it. An F-16 can fly about twice before it needs more maintenance. An M-1 tank goes but a few miles before it needs fuel. Soldiers cannot live past a week without food.

Sorry, but you give credit to the military as though it is some kind of beast with magical powers never needing food, water, or parts and is some kind of monster none of us know anything about. The military system is extremely fragile in that is needs constant care and feeding.

16
posted on 01/21/2013 9:36:34 AM PST
by CodeToad
(Liberals are bloodsucking ticks. We need to light the matchstick to burn them off.)

With the military being the group that holds the hammer, should we not be looking at ways to influence service members? I have considered making flyers and going to hangouts, parking lots and other venues near the military base closest to me.

Maybe we should be discussing ways to communicate the importance of their oath and give them the tools to share their knowledge with other service members. The left has given us some pretty effective models, i.e. community organizers, Alinsky methods, and such. Maybe start getting Alinsky style personal with the left leaning Officers who are implementing the administrations diktats.

I, and many Freepers and Tea Party types are veterans and we have connections on bases. I believe it is past time we go on the offensive in the propaganda war.

The current military is being indoctrinated and purged. Disobeying orders is a big deal. That is what the plan turns on: how many side with the government-turned-globalist, versus how many actually rebel against it. Very importantly, which specific personnel. Obviously the government would place Generals and officers in command of every fort / installation that were loyal, and dismiss and bring up on charges those who tried to turn over the fort to the rebels. If enough of the leadership of a fort went rebel, that would be a rebellion/treason/standoff situation. So the big question in Civil War is, which installations go rebel and which stay globalist.

Those civilians who maintain the equipment work for defense contractors. Those companies and people that work for them will keep doing the work in order to get paid. Depending on how much “resistance” they offered they could be fired or brought up on charges. Those who go along would be able to keep living as they are now, buy food and paying the mortgage, getting new cars and going on vacation. Men face a difficult proposition in risking their homes/wives/children.

As far as the government forces needing supply, yes, but so do the rebels. And that’s what I’m saying, IMHO, the government forces would have a decided advantage in supply except in one case: where the majority of the active military - especially the officer corp - goes against the government-turned-globalist and side with the rebels.

IMHO, what the populace says will have a very big effect on what the military thinks, if what the populace says is dramatic enough. Perhaps along the lines of what you said, where part of the public outcry is a massive walkout on defense contractors ?

Ergo, we see the bankster propaganda machine focusing on public opinion and the officer corps.

Also, beware the banksters turning on their own guy. They install another of their guys as head of the rebels (he brings funding and support they give him). After the revolution he slips into power - this is their specialty. The people will think they have succeeded but the banksters will continue “advising” (controlling) the government, hidden in plain sight via the CFR or a successor front organization.

It’s a danged difficult puzzle. If there is an actual Civil War, the government borrows even more from the banksters. Also, remember the worldwide press/propaganda is globalist and so is the bankster community; the government could borrow a trillion in a snap. The military could be greatly enlarged. Could implement a draft and jail those who refuse. Government would order Governors to use all their police - so which States would comply and how defensible are the resisting States ? If the military had a loyal base inside the resisting State, the State find it very difficult to not capitulate. Ft. Hood pretty much determines which way Texas can go, etc., Ft Dix/McGuire Determines NY/NJ/PA/northeast - globalist ?, etc.

IMHO, best to work directly right now on raising awareness, gaining influence, bolstering small business (and some more peaceful strategies), and ripping open the bankster can of worms out in public for all to see. There are ways out of this but we need some “community organizing”, not just blogging.

No question about that at all. I am talking about millions of defense contractor personnel required to keep it all flowing. How many of them would continue to do so if they thought the military was being used against them? Very few.

21
posted on 01/21/2013 10:49:30 AM PST
by CodeToad
(Liberals are bloodsucking ticks. We need to light the matchstick to burn them off.)

I know I’d quit in that situation. This is part of why I think we have hope. But I hate thinking to myself “it could never happen” then just ignore the problem. IMHO, we urgently need to stop this century long statist spiral at it’s root, because the one world government idea is marching forward.

But those who respond to my invitations via FReepmail, I consider them part of think tank exploratory group. I have shared my info with those people and I have asked them for their info. I didn’t know who are, they don’t know who I am. We will exchange info, talk, ask for references, etc., until we are satisfied. Ask to talk to the references - you can talk to mine. I have zero to hide.

I’m telling participants who I am - answering any questions they have. Which so far has been none (I guess my resume was enough, they see that I’m just some geek dude). I’m asking them who they are. (We’re gonna have a secret meeting soon. Shhhh. Hilary’s vast right wing conspiracy. Ooooooo).

Those who respond and ask about participating (for real) will all want to know who each other are, that they are who they say they are. Then they can make an informed decision about whether they want to join the Think Tank and in what capacity.

Trouble is today TV and the Internet have replaced reality for many people. In short, they don’t want to take the tiniest risk, and they don’t want to put out any effort; stuck in a work-to-couch loop.

It’s more than just a ping list on FR at this point.

It is moving into becoming it’s own organization, like the Boy Scouts or the Chamber of Commerce. It will have meetings, phone calls, emails, etc., and plans will be formed and executed.

It will be separate and distinct from every other conservative organization, website, etc. It’s brand new. It has no backers yet. None. The whole plan is to specifically not have big major backers; to not be a front organization. No CIA, no Koch brothers, no Birchers, no Nazis, no secret left-wing backers, etc. The idea is to be a “front” organization, as it were, for small business owners who also see the Bible as their rule and guide for life. It’s not a Church, though - it’s a business.

Once marketing begins, other people will join. The exact same issue arises: who are these new people really, and they will want to know who the current members are really.

Everybody wants to know who they are dealing with.

If you FReepmail me, I’ll send you my info and I’ll look forward to you grilling me like a tuna.

I guess you fail to consider it's a lot of our kids who are manning them tanks and planes.

Not for a second, I have relatives in the military.

It's not the guys at that level that will be the problem, it's the Generals and those who want to be Generals.

Look at 20th century totalitarianism and how the affected militaries coped. Top level officers get purged until someone does the crazy man's bidding.

HG, God bless the men in the tanks and planes, but look at what's happened in the past. Everyone never ever dreamed in their wildest dreams that their sons would be caught up in such vile situations.

God help us and have the senior officers do the right thing.

But we should shine as much light as possible on the truth, no ? I don't want to be trying make myself believe "someone attacked our radio station so we went to war", etc., I'd rather shine the light on evil unelected actors who, IMHO, illegitimately mold U.S. policy.

Who was that staffer? More importantly...who is in that West Point "think tank"?

No idea. Why don't you email the washingtontimes and ask?

Gee. What you can find out with a couple clicks on a mouse....

At the time of the attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001, West Point's counterterrorism curriculum consisted of a single elective class. In order to fill this gap and provide greater educational resources in terrorism-related issues, the Academy welcomed the creation of the Combating Terrorism Center and included it in its Department of Social Sciences on February 20, 2003. Though thus a part of the United States Military Academy, the CTC was established with private funding and is an independent research group. Primary funding for the founding of the CTC was contributed by Vincent Viola, a 1977 graduate of the United States Military Academy and former chairman of the New York Mercantile Exchange; significant initial support was also provided by Ross Perot, George Gilmore Jr. and Major (ret.) George Gilmore Sr. The Center's first Distinguished Chair was General (Retired) Wayne Downing until his death in 2007. General (Retired) John P. Abizaid, the former commander of Central Command, presently holds the Distinguished Chair. The current director, Major Bryan C. Price, began his tenure in August 2012.

I am talking about millions of defense contractor personnel required to keep it all flowing. How many of them would continue to do so if they thought the military was being used against them? Very few.

Sorry CT, but I have worked in Iraq, A-stan, and the southern Philippines for major US contractors. Those people would do the same as the Iraqi's and Afghani's that worked for the US military machine. The dollar talks.

34
posted on 01/21/2013 7:21:17 PM PST
by Sarajevo
(Don't think for a minute that this excuse for a President has America's best interest in mind.)

Curriculum Vitae EXPERT BIO Special thanks to the West Point Class of 1977 for generously supporting this position-

Arie Perliger is the Director of Terrorism Studies at the Combating Terrorism Center and Assistant Professor at the Department of Social Sciences, US Military Academy at West Point. After completing his PhD in Political Science at the University of Haifa Israel (2007), where he was also a fellow at the National Security Studies Center (NSSC), Dr. Perliger became affiliated with the Department of Political Science at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem as a Golda Meir Post-Doctoral Fellow (2007-2008). On August 2008 Dr. Perliger joined the Department of Political Science at the State University of New York at Stony Brook, where he was a Schusterman Visiting Assistant Professor until the summer of 2010.

In the past decade Dr. Perliger has studied extensively issues related to Terrorism and Political Violence, Politics of Security, Politics of the Far Right in Israel, Europe and the US, Middle Eastern Politics and the applicability of Social Network Analysis to the study of social phenomena. His studies appeared in four books and more than 20 articles and book chapters by publishers such as Columbia University Press, Rutledge, Security Studies, Social Forces and others.

Dr. Perliger is the co-editor of the journal Democracy and Security and a regular reviewer for various publishers and Journals such as Political Psychology, Critical Studies on Terrorism, Terrorism and Political Violence, Columbia University Press, Chicago University Press, Routledge and Polity Press.

That many people can’t keep a secret. So when we get wind of intended movement, down go the databases, software, and servers. We’ll send their @sses back to the stone age with a few passes across the keyboard.

I’m happy to meet them on the field of battle in the stone age. I can win there too.

39
posted on 01/22/2013 8:40:40 AM PST
by BuckeyeTexan
(There are those that break and bend. I'm the other kind.)

For who, first, you’ll need to research a bit about J P Morgan, John D. Rockefeller, Sr. and the size of their “empires” and their scope - how many Boards of Directors of different companies were controlled by them and men working for them. One has to do the reading to get back in time and understand what they controlled, how large the empires were and the way of interlocking directorships.

The Panic of 1907 history has been sanitized in most published books, but you can find some articles and books that do not leave out essential details which, when analyzed with only a little common sense, make it obvious that it was engineered to create a bank run.

Then it’s, of course, important to understand that out of the panic of 1907 came a tremendous fear and outcry which put the public in a mindset that was ready to accept the Federal Reserve. Why would the most powerful banking interests want that arrangement ?

I love it when liberals say “some projects are so big only the government can do them”. You’ve heard this, right ? It’s a bold-faced lie, sarcastically flaunting the real motives right out there in public. It’s real easy to cut through. Where does the government, since 1913 get its money from from ? Taxes, right ? Well, it has a stream of tax revenue coming in every year from the private sector. But the Treasury issues bonds and borrows out in front of the taxes collected. Think about it - it’s the private sector buyers of Treasury bonds who are providing the financing to the government. Could the treasury sell it’s bonds without the primary dealer banks ? Over $3,000 per American per year would be needed to fund a $1T deficit, so the answer is no. Ergo, the major banks are the creditors of the government, the banker they need to go talk to when the government needs money.

Charles W. Morse, essential in the Panic of 1907, did have dealings with J P Morgan; I have a pdf copy of an original newspaper story announcing that J P Morgan financed his $10,000,000 purchase of a steamship company. Morse’s “attempt to corner the copper market” is what the santized versions of the story point to, and they talk about an ensuing panic and people withdrawing deposits from banks. If you search, you’ll find that the interests I’m talking about, though this is not mentioned in sanitized versions of the story, from their own deposits in various banks, made withdrawals, called in loans, etc., that actually kicked the panic into gear.

Morgan and Rockefeller did not run their empires themselves, they had numerous high-level employees and partners in their businesses, friends and allies in related companies, and they had heirs as well. The people at the top of these empires thought quite highly of themselves to be sure: they saw how efficiently they could run a business and how smart they were and how they could steamroll over the government by backing or opposing politicians selectively.

Part of all the let’s say “unconventional” business tactics they adopted regarding influencing government and society in order to achieve their ends was the idea of setting up tax-free foundations and putting large sums into them as endowments. Us “little people” don’t “get it”, though. The sums were not cash, but stock they owned in various related companies, of which they controlled the Board of Directors. Since they, their heirs, lawyers, etc., control the foundations and sit on their boards of directors, the voting rights of the stock the foundation owns are exercised - according to what suits them. So even though they have “given away half their stock” in company A, B, C, they still control how that half votes. They still control the election of directors, thus they still control the board of directors of company A,B,C.

Since those early days the various interests have simply continued on. Peggy Dulany is an example of a direct heir, though one has to understand that all the original business partners, managers and associates also have heirs. Of course, the group is not just heirs, but anyone who came into that network through perhaps their career, education, perhaps leftist ideology or organizing. And the group is not a set group necessarily with a membership roll and a published mission statement. These people fill the ranks of the Boards of Directors of foundations, endowments, think tanks, policy development organizations, universities and charities, as well as for-profit corporations whose Boards have their roots in this same network, or were sucked into the network’s influence sphere along the way.

While leftism is a cause that is useful to them, few of those closest to the inside track would say they are statists, communists, leftists, etc. Big capital’s support of totalitariasm and leftism is the secret that they need to keep hidden from both the political left and right. The big money people need to stay in the background in the news. And whenever they do appear in public or are covered in the press, they are wearing their capitalist hat. But almost all like the idea of eroding national sovereignty in favor of something more “organized”, because we have to “solve problems” like overpopulation, disease, etc., that are “too big” for anyone to solve on their own.

Why ? They are monopolists. In order to have any concept of that you must imagine yourself in, say, Bill Gates position, and have some basic business knowledge. All shareholders want ROI, return on investment, which is, profit at the end of a year. But each year there is profit left in the corporation and not paid out as a dividend, the “I” gets that much bigger. Closing the books at the end of the year, to use the jargon, moves the final net income after everything to Retained Earnings; it increases Owner’s Equity. So if my stock in a company was worth $100 at book value last year, after this year’s $5 profit it’s now worth $105. Now next year, I need to earn 5% on $105. Next year, to earn 5%, I’d need to earn $5.25. The next year, I’d need to earn $5.51. So the big corporation who as a virtual monopoly on the whole U.S. market for operating system and office software must embark on a search for new revenue, or start cutting costs by shrinking its workforce in order to not see it’s ROI % start shrinking as, over the years, equity piles up on the balance sheet. Consequently he gets into new products like gaming in the same geographical area. Of course, he also looks to other countries to make sales. Every company that monopolizes faces this challenge; finding places to expand. Over time, the squashing of competition becomes instinctful, since it tends to drive prices down and therefore pressures margins and hurts ROI. In no way can the monopolist see that he can’t take it with him, that he could split up the company into competing parts and he’d still do well, though some would succeed and some would fail. Thus we have behemoths who dominate whole industries, and their economies of scale are more than undone by the ease with which they can force higher prices without providing any new real economic utility in their products and services.

To a monopolist, certainly any “establishment” person, other countries includes communist or islamic countries. In fact, Wall Street happily embarked on ventures in the USSR from the outset of the Revolution, even helping to get it started. They like a controlled, managed market. How ? That’s crazy business, it’s not free enterprise. No, it’s not, but these guys are monopolists, not small business owners.

This is the situation Standard Oil and Wall Street found itself in as the 20th century unfolded, long after the orginal guys had died. They really do think that they are the smartest and that the smartest need to run things. Don’t we all feel that the government can’t run anything well ? Just imagine how such elite people must feel about government ! That’s why they get more into just running things, doing things on their own, simply backing or opposing politicians to get “their guys” to have enough influence in the State Dept and Congress and the White House so that they can alternate between projects and get them done with government helping them. Some projects create money-making opportunities for them directly, others do not make money or may even cost them money, but they create some kind of influence or control mechanism that enables them to make enormous sums of money the easy way later on.

One common theme in this network is avoiding taxes themselves. I found that GE goes way back in this network, and suddenly the GE has enough credits to net out their tax bill makes perfect sense.

You need to get into the details of how this “establishment” has done business with totalitarian states. Some of it is described in Antony Sutton’s work, which is very eye-opening, but of course could not possibly cover every transation.

Also, regarding command/control. Members of the Council on Foreign Relations, throughout its history, have thoroughly dominated the State Dept and are essentially an exclusive club of Presidential advisors. The CFR, being founded by J P Morgan, is obviously a front organization for these interests. It is unelected (by invitation only), has no legitimacy Constitutionally, is largely unknown by the general public, is funded by donations by these “interests”. It has a sister organization in the U.K.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.